From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
Received: from mail.droids-corp.org (zoll.droids-corp.org [94.23.50.67])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90B964C6F
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Thu, 26 Apr 2018 21:42:21 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [37.168.106.214] (helo=droids-corp.org)
 by mail.droids-corp.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256)
 (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from <olivier.matz@6wind.com>)
 id 1fBmmZ-00033H-Cw; Thu, 26 Apr 2018 21:42:20 +0200
Received: by droids-corp.org (sSMTP sendmail emulation);
 Thu, 26 Apr 2018 21:42:09 +0200
Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2018 21:42:09 +0200
From: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
To: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
Cc: Andrew Rybchenko <arybchenko@solarflare.com>,
 Yongseok Koh <yskoh@mellanox.com>, wenzhuo.lu@intel.com,
 jingjing.wu@intel.com, dev@dpdk.org, konstantin.ananyev@intel.com,
 stephen@networkplumber.org, adrien.mazarguil@6wind.com,
 nelio.laranjeiro@6wind.com
Message-ID: <20180426194208.vm7rr5svn6xq7ki5@neon>
References: <20180310012532.15809-1-yskoh@mellanox.com>
 <20180426011010.28078-1-yskoh@mellanox.com>
 <1a65f081-4c92-78d5-b00c-08e66fdef5c8@solarflare.com>
 <1854520.Legm0nyyME@xps>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1854520.Legm0nyyME@xps>
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2)
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 1/2] mbuf: support attaching external
	buffer to mbuf
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2018 19:42:21 -0000

On Thu, Apr 26, 2018 at 06:10:36PM +0200, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> 26/04/2018 18:05, Andrew Rybchenko:
> > On 04/26/2018 04:10 AM, Yongseok Koh wrote:
> > > -#define RTE_MBUF_INDIRECT(mb)   ((mb)->ol_flags & IND_ATTACHED_MBUF)
> > > +#define RTE_MBUF_INDIRECT(mb)   RTE_MBUF_CLONED(mb)
> > 
> > We have discussed that it would be good to deprecate RTE_MBUF_INDIRECT()
> > since it is not !RTE_MBUF_DIREC(). Is it lost here or intentional (may 
> > be I've lost
> > in the thread)?
> 
> I think it should be a separate deprecation notice.

Agree with Andrew that RTE_MBUF_INDIRECT should be deprecated
to avoid confusion with !DIRECT.